Will a European action complicate my US case?

How the two proceedings interact is aligned between your European and US litigation counsel; on request, TYR coordinates closely with your US team. In practice, European actions often drive the global settlement.

We never registered German utility models. Is it too late?

Often not. Utility models can be branched off a pending EP or DE application and tailored to the accused product. Whether this is possible in a given case is assessed by the European patent attorneys instructed.

TYR works on a success-based model aligned with your outcome and arranges litigation funding that covers attorneys, court fees and adverse-cost exposure.

Does TYR act as European counsel?

No. TYR assesses, prepares, funds and coordinates. Legal advice and representation are provided by experienced European litigators and patent attorneys, which TYR coordinates on request.

Europe as Leverage for US Patent Holders

The short answer: US patent holders often overlook their European counterparts. In Germany and at the Unified Patent Court, injunctions are the norm once infringement is found, a first-instance judgment can arrive in around 12 months, and there is no US-style discovery. A parallel European action can therefore create settlement pressure well before a US case reaches trial.

The overlooked half of your portfolio

Many US companies invest heavily in patents but focus enforcement on the US alone. Their European counterparts – EP patents granted on the same inventions – sit in the portfolio largely unused. That is a missed opportunity: the same infringers that sell in the US very often sell or manufacture in Europe, too.

US litigation is slow, and injunctions are hard to get. In Germany and at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the picture is different. Your EP patents are leverage – the question is how to use them.

Why Germany and the UPC

Injunctions as the norm

Post-eBay, permanent injunctions in the US are elusive for many patentees. German courts, by contrast, grant injunctions as a matter of course when infringement is found – and the UPC follows the same approach. An injunction blocks the defendant’s access to some of Europe’s largest markets. The threat of losing European revenue alone often brings defendants to the negotiating table.

Speed

A patent case in Germany can reach a first-instance judgment in around 12 months. While a US case slogs through IPR or discovery, a parallel German action on the EP counterpart can reach judgment first – and force a global resolution.

Reach

With a single UPC action, a patent can be enforced in 17 countries. Where multi-state reach is decisive, the UPC multiplies the impact of one case.

No discovery

There is no broad US-style pre-trial discovery in Germany or at the UPC. Proceedings are streamlined, predictable and far cheaper than US litigation – which also means that evidence has to be gathered thoroughly before filing.

Preliminary relief

German and UPC preliminary injunctions can halt sales while the main action proceeds – pressure in weeks, not years. Meeting the standard for preliminary relief requires well-prepared claim charts, validity support and product evidence from day one.

Injunction leverage vs. US litigation

Damages awarded in Europe are often smaller than in the US. But the strategic value of a European action lies elsewhere: in the injunction. A defendant facing the loss of European sales has strong reasons to settle – and that settlement frequently covers the global dispute, including the US. Opening a second front where the patent holder holds the advantage can flip the dynamics of the entire case.

Utility model branching as a tactic

One tool is particularly underused by US patent holders: the German utility model (Gebrauchsmuster). While an EP or DE application is still pending, utility models can be branched off it. The result is a registered, enforceable right within weeks – and an independent right that can be tailored to the accused product.

This is often possible even late in the game – even up to two months after a patent case concludes, within ten years of filing. Combined with divisionals and claim limitation, branching can sharpen the claim read on the accused product and speed up access to injunctive relief. Whether and how it applies in a given case is a question for the European patent attorneys instructed.

How TYR unlocks European enforcement

TYR acts as an extension of your US team. TYR assesses, prepares, funds and coordinates:

Infringement research: TYR’s patent engineers scour European markets for potentially infringing products and document the technical evidence.
Portfolio optimization: TYR identifies opportunities – divisionals, claim limitation, German utility models branched off pending applications – which the patent attorneys instructed implement.
Integrated EU team: experienced European litigators paired with TYR’s in-house engineers; TYR handles organization, coordination and translations across jurisdictions.
End-to-end coordination: technical claim charts, expert reports and alignment between your European and US counsel, who decide on litigation strategy.

On the funding side, TYR works on a success-based model and arranges litigation funding that covers attorneys, court fees and adverse-cost exposure. Market-standard for litigation funding is 30–40 % of the proceeds; the details are agreed case by case. For more, read How does patent litigation funding work?.

Getting started

Send TYR your portfolio or the name of the infringer. You will receive a free, confidential initial assessment of the monetization potential of your EP counterparts with regard to relevant products – typically within two weeks. The legal assessment and representation in Europe are provided by specialized law firms and patent attorneys, which TYR coordinates on request.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice.

For US patent holders

Europe as leverage for US patent holders